The ironic thing some notable gun-control-supporting politicians might figure out—one day, after some much-needed introspection—is that by vilifying law-enforcement and reducing police budgets, and by passing “no-cash-bail” policies that allow arrested criminals to walk (as George Soros-backed prosecutors refused, in a shocking number of cases, to prosecute bad guys), they have convinced many unarmed citizens that they’d better become armed citizens.
You’d think that those pushing this ideology would grasp that when people realize they are basically gazelles wandering among hungry lions—predators some in the government are going out of their way to let onto the streets—they need to find ways to defend themselves.
It shouldn’t then be surprising that self-defense is the leading reason why an estimated 17-million-plus Americans decided to become first-time gun owners since 2020.
If gun-control devotees really want to get more restrictions and bans made into law, logically you’d think they’d do all they can to support good policing and to get prosecutors elected who will prosecute violent criminals; after all, if they really want people to believe they don’t need self-defense guns because the state will protect them, then gun-control-promoting politicians should be doing all they can to ensure the government is protecting people.
Of course, as anyone with common sense knows, either way, when a violent criminal decides to prey on someone, the police are likely minutes away—maybe many minutes—whereas a self-defense gun should be right there. We are our first line of defense. The Founders understood this, which is a big reason why the Second Amendment was included in the U.S. Bill of Rights. Such is why even a good police force does not negate the need for our freedom. The police simply can’t be everywhere all the time. And, anyway, we really don’t want law-enforcement’s watchful eyes to be everywhere, all the time—that kind of constant surveillance is the stuff of dystopian fiction for a long list of freedom-killing reasons.
Now, as irony is communicating the opposite of a word’s meaning, it must be noted that there are other ironies at play here; for example, the “gun-free zone” signs in Times Square and in so many other places where “gun-safety” advocates make policy, are frighteningly ironic, as mass-murderers almost always choose to attack citizens in these so-called “gun-free zones.”
Which brings this around to a critical central point: We don’t want to be the victims of gun-control advocates’ irony.
This is one way of looking at why we’re members of the NRA. It’s why we shake our heads when the mainstream media refers to gun-control groups as “gun-safety” organizations, even as these groups’ stated policies aren’t written to make us any safer.
So, though these might be unintended ironies, they are still intentional deceit from gun-control-promoting politicians and groups. As always, the way to stop (or reverse) this kind of bad thinking from legislators is to vote them out. Doing that requires telling more voters what is really happening.
